Advisory & Defence Changes

The policy is in effect for all students beginning their program May 1, 2022, onward.  Academic units may choose to adopt these changes for advisory committees where students began before that date and are encouraged to consider it for students that are in the early years of their program.

The Ph.D. advisory committee consists of at least three members:

1. Supervisor*

The supervisor is a member of CGPS faculty.  This includes Adjunct Professors. It does not include Professional Affiliates. The supervisor will typically chair regular meetings of the advisory committee and make sure that the committee’s periodic student progress reports, program of study, and meeting minutes are completed and forwarded to the unit’s graduate administrator for filing.

KEY CHANGE: The supervisor may chair the advisory committee meetings.

2. Additional member

This is a member of CGPS faculty, including Adjunct Professors. A Professional Affiliate or someone approved for one-time membership by CGPS can also serve in this role.

KEY CHANGE: A reduction from two to one additional member as the minimum.

3. Cognate member

The cognate member is a member of CGPS faculty.  This includes Adjunct Professors. It does not include Professional Affiliates. The cognate member is from a different principal academic unit than the student and supervisor. Associate faculty members holding a secondary appointment in the unit are eligible, for example, to serve as the cognate member.

KEY CHANGE: Associate faculty and Adjunct Professors can now serve as the cognate member. Cognate members no longer need to be eligible to be the sole supervisor of a doctoral student.

* A Co-Supervisor may be included, if applicable.  Co-supervisors share a vote in decision-making, and essentially count as one member. A Professional Affiliate or someone approved for one-time membership by CGPS may serve as a co-supervisor, with permission from CGPS.

NO CHANGE FROM PREVIOUS.

To summarize, the supervisor and the cognate member are both members of CGPS faculty, which includes adjunct professors.  The additional advisory committee member and co-supervisor (if applicable) may be either from the CGPS faculty or an expert from inside or outside USask that is not a member of CGPS faculty, whose expertise merits appointment as a professional affiliate or as a one-time member (on a single advisory committee).  Some common examples of professional affiliates or one-time members are experts with pertinent community or technical knowledge, faculty from other universities with expertise relevant to a student’s research, or university staff who are not faculty.

KEY CHANGE: The Graduate Chair, Head, Dean/Executive Director (non-departmentalized colleges/schools) or designate is not required by CGPS policy to serve as the Chair of advisory committees.  Instead, they are a non-voting ex officio member that may be included in committee meetings and deliberations at the invitation of the student, supervisor(s), or any other member of the advisory committee as need arises.

NOTE: Academic units that would prefer to continue to require the Graduate Chair, Head, Dean/Executive Director (non-departmentalized colleges/schools) or designate serve as Chair of advisory committees, attending every meeting of the committee or only certain program milestone meetings, may certainly do so in accordance with the policy and practice set by the academic unit. It is simply not required by CGPS policy.

IMPLEMENTATION DATE: These changes are in effect for all defences held from May 1, 2022 onward, with the possible exception of the University Examiner*.

* Until April 30, 2024, the University Examiner is an optional member of the examining committee for defences where (1) the student began their program in a Catalogue year prior to 2022-23 (i.e., prior to May 1, 2022); and, (2) where the examining committee chair, the supervisor and all members of the advisory committee and external examiner would equal at least six members. As of May 1, 2024, the University Examiner will be required for all doctoral defences, reflecting current policy.

The Ph.D. dissertation examining committee consists of at least six members:

1. Chair (non-voting)

The chair of the examining committee is the Graduate Chair, Head, Dean/Executive Director (non-departmentalized colleges/schools) or designate. The Supervisor (Co-supervisor, if applicable) and other members of the advisory or examining committee may not serve as the chair at the defence.

KEY CHANGE: The Dean’s Designate role has been removed and the role of Examining Committee Chair is fulfilled within the academic unit.

2. Supervisor (and co-supervisor, if applicable)
   
   
3. Additional member (from advisory committee)

KEY CHANGE: As per advisory committee reduction from two to one additional member.

4. Cognate member (from advisory committee)
   
   
5. University examiner

Approved by the Graduate Chair, Head, Dean/Executive Director (non-departmentalized colleges/schools) or designate using the criteria below. The university examiner has an “arm’s length” relationship with the Ph.D. dissertation research.

Will:

• Be a member of the faculty of the CGPS (Adjunct Professors included, but cannot be a Professional Affiliate);
• Normally have a Ph.D. degree or equivalent;
• Have suitable knowledge in the general field of dissertation research;
• Ideally, have previous experience supervising or examining doctoral students.

Will not:

• Have been directly involved in the candidate’s Ph.D. dissertation research;
• Have served on the candidate’s Ph.D. advisory committee;
• Be related (e.g., family, partner) to the candidate or supervisor.

May:

• Be from within or outside the academic unit of the candidate and supervisor(s), provided the arm’s length criteria noted above are met;
• Have taught the candidate in classes and interacted in other ways not directly related to the dissertation research.

KEY CHANGE: The University examiner is a new role on the Ph.D. dissertation examining committee.

6. External examiner

Approved by the Associate Dean, CGPS. The external examiner will have an “arm’s-length” relationship with the student, the supervisor and members of the advisory committee.

KEY CHANGE: While the external examiner still cannot have collaborated with the supervisor or student in scholarly activities during the past 6 years, the restriction no longer applies to the relationship between the external examiner and other members of the advisory/examining committee.

IMPLEMENTATION DATE: These changes are in effect for all defences held from May 1, 2022 onward.

The academic unit advises CGPS when the dissertation is ready for defence, a University Examiner is selected and has agreed to serve, and the unit has a recommendation for at least one person(s) to serve as External Examiner.  This is done at least five (5) weeks prior to the desired defence date.  Once the External Examiner is approved by the Associate Dean, the CGPS Program Advisor will send an official invitation and the dissertation at least four (4) weeks prior to the date of defence to both the University Examiner and the External Examiner. It is the responsibility of the academic unit to coordinate the details of the defence including confirmed date, time, and venue with all defence participants following the official invitation being sent to the University Examiner and the External Examiner by the CGPS Program Advisor.

KEY CHANGE: The academic unit submits to CGPS the name of its selected University Examiner at the same time as it submits the name and CV of its recommended External Examiner.

Defences may occur in-person on-campus; remotely through digital platforms; or, by a combination of both. The three most common scenarios for holding a defence are:

• External examiner participates remotely through a digital platform; candidate and all other examining committee members are in-person on-campus in a room equipped for high quality video-conferencing;
• Candidate and all examining committee members are on-campus, in-person; or,
• Some members of the examining committee and/or candidate participate remotely through a digital platform; others are in-person on-campus in a room equipped for high quality video-conferencing.

KEY CHANGE: The defence format has more platform flexibility built into it, no longer requiring an exclusively on-campus in-person approach.

IMPLEMENTATION DATE: The policy is in effect for all students beginning their program May 1, 2022 onward.  Academic units may choose to adopt these changes for advisory committees where students began before that date.

The master’s advisory committee consists of at least two members:

1. Supervisor*

The supervisor is a member of CGPS faculty.  This includes Adjunct Professors. It does not include Professional Affiliates. The supervisor will typically chair regular meetings of the advisory committee and make sure that the committee’s periodic student progress reports, program of study, and meeting minutes are completed and forwarded to the unit’s graduate administrator for filing.

KEY CHANGE: The supervisor may chair the advisory committee meetings.

2. Additional member

This is a member of CGPS faculty, including Adjunct Professors. A Professional Affiliate or someone approved for one-time membership by CGPS can also serve in this role.

NO CHANGE FROM PREVIOUS.

* A Co-Supervisor may be included, if applicable.  Co-supervisors share a vote in decision-making, and essentially count as one member. A Professional Affiliate or someone approved for one-time membership by CGPS may serve as a co-supervisor, with permission from CGPS.

NO CHANGE FROM PREVIOUS.

KEY CHANGE: The Graduate Chair, Head, Dean/Executive Director (non-departmentalized colleges/schools) or designate is not required by CGPS policy to serve as the Chair of advisory committees.  Instead, they are a non-voting ex officio member that may be included in committee meetings and deliberations at the invitation of the student, supervisor(s), or any other member of the advisory committee as need arises.

NOTE: Academic units that would prefer to continue to require the Graduate Chair, Head, Dean/Executive Director (non-departmentalized colleges/schools) or designate serve as Chair of advisory committees, attending every meeting of the committee or only certain program milestone meetings, may certainly do so in accordance with the policy and practice set by the academic unit. It is simply not required by CGPS policy.

IMPLEMENTATION DATE: These changes are in effect for all defences held from May 1, 2022 onward.

An oral defence of the master’s thesis is required, though it is up to academic units to establish and implement the process for conducting master’s thesis defences.

After the advisory committee has agreed the thesis is acceptable for examination, the Graduate Chair, Head, Dean/Executive Director (non-departmentalized colleges/schools) or designate will approve an arm’s length examiner for the defence and notify their CGPS Program Advisor so that CGPS can ensure that the student’s program requirements (all but thesis defence) have been met.

The adequacy of the thesis is decided by an examining committee consisting of the supervisor, the additional member(s) of the advisory committee, and one arm’s length examiner who has not been a member of the student's advisory committee. The arm’s length examiner may be from within or outside the academic unit but should not have been directly involved in the student’s thesis research. The arm’s length examiner must have the thesis a minimum of two (2) weeks prior to the defence date.

NOTE: The CGPS does not universally require a non-voting chair on the examining committee for master’s thesis oral defences.  However, the academic unit may add a non-voting chair to the examining committee, who is a member of the faculty of the CGPS, in accordance with the policy and practice of the academic unit, or upon request from the student, supervisor(s), or any other member of the examining committee to the Graduate Chair, Head, Dean/Executive Director (non-departmentalized colleges/schools) or designate.

KEY CHANGES: Academic units will establish and implement a consistent, predictable, rigorous, and procedurally fair process for holding and adjudicating master’s thesis oral defences, with less direct involvement from CGPS.  Academic units must still inform CGPS that the defence will occur, the name of the arm’s length examiner, and the result of the defence.  Each student must still submit the approved electronic version of the thesis to the Electronic Theses and Dissertations (ETD) site at the end of their program.

The advisory committee is the central group of experts that educate, mentor, inspire, role-model, and adjudicate graduate students, over a period of years at the university and often beyond graduation within professional networks. In addition to research and (inter-) disciplinary expertise, Graduate Chairs, Heads, Deans/Executive Directors (non-departmentalized colleges/schools) or designates must consider other factors when composing student advisory committees, including, but not limited to, the following:

1. Student perspective - Knowing the academic, personal, and career goals of the student and ensuring the student has a voice in selecting their advisory committee.
   
   
2. Equity, diversity, and inclusion - Success and the overall experience of students with a range of personal attributes and qualities, diverse talents, perspectives, backgrounds, worldviews, ways of knowing, skills, and abilities, will be supported by a diverse advisory committee (e.g., race, gender identity, cultural background, lived experience, physical ability). [see USask Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Policy]
   
   
3. Conflict of interest – Situations where the private interests of a prospective member(s) conflict with, or could reasonably be perceived to conflict with, their obligations to provide impartial advice, support, and to exercise independent judgment on an advisory committee, must be avoided. Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest to the Graduate Chair, Head, Dean/Executive Director (non-departmentalized colleges/schools) or designate must occur, and consideration of their implications should occur in the process of constituting advisory committees and at the first full advisory committee meeting with the student. [see USask Conflict of Interest Policy]